May 28, 2025
HANOI – National Assembly deputies on Tuesday held an intense debate on a controversial proposal to remove the death penalty for the crime of illegally transporting narcotics, during the ongoing 9th session of the 15th NA.
This offence, as part of a draft amendment to the Penal Code, is one of eight crimes for which the Government has proposed eliminating capital punishment and replacing it with life imprisonment without any chance of sentence reduction.
The other crimes include national security offences such as subversive activities, espionage, and sabotage as well as serious economic and social crimes like embezzlement, bribery and the production or trade of counterfeit medicines.
During the discussion, Deputy Nguyễn Thị Thu Nguyệt from Đắk Lắk Province said she supported replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole, calling it a necessary move aligned with international trends and the direction of the Politburo and the Party Central Committee.
However, she urged a thorough and cautious approach to reviewing the proposal, especially in relation to drug transport crimes.
She said despite the current application of the death penalty for drug-related offences, the number of cases involving the trafficking, sale, and manufacture of narcotics in Việt Nam continued to rise. The offenders, she noted, had become increasingly reckless and dangerous, resulting in the deaths of numerous law enforcement officers.
“We must ask whether replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole would retain sufficient deterrent effect,” she said. “Could this legal change open loopholes that allow such crimes to proliferate? Will it help us meet our goals of reducing drug supply and demand?”
Echoing these concerns, Deputy Phạm Khánh Phong Lan from HCM City questioned the logic of abolishing the death penalty for this offence, especially as drug crimes are becoming more sophisticated and more damaging.
“Law enforcement agencies are already stretched thin in their fight against drug crimes. Why are we considering lighter sentences?” she asked. “This defies logic.”
Lan also pointed out that while policymakers may seek to show compassion, they must also consider the perspectives of the victims’ families.
“Most drug traffickers fully understand the consequences of their actions. Yet they proceed out of greed,” she said. “To be lenient is to betray the victims.”
Agreeing with Lan, Deputy Phạm Văn Hòa from Đồng Tháp Province likened drug transport to the “twin brother” of drug trafficking and manufacturing, arguing they are inseparable.
“Without those who transport drugs, there would be no distribution or consumption,” he said. “This crime must remain punishable by death.”
However, not all deputies shared this stance.
Deputy Nguyễn Thị Việt Nga from Hải Dương Province supported the shift to life imprisonment without the possibility of commutation. She said it reflected the State’s humanitarian approach, while still ensuring serious punishment for particularly dangerous crimes. She added that this sentence should be clearly distinguished from regular life imprisonment to maintain its deterrent effect.
Nga noted that many countries had already abolished or drastically limited the use of capital punishment, and Việt Nam’s proposed reforms would reflect this global trend toward progressive, humane criminal justice policies. For some crimes, she argued, the death penalty would neither be necessary nor effective.
She made a distinction between drug manufacturing and trafficking, which are typically highly organised and profit-driven, and drug transport, which often involves individuals who are exploited due to poverty or lack of legal knowledge.
“In many cases, those caught transporting drugs are vulnerable people manipulated by criminal networks. They are not the masterminds,” she said.
She noted that ringleaders involved in drug production and distribution already face the death penalty under other charges. Therefore, removing the death sentence specifically for drug transport offences would be consistent with differentiated and individualised sentencing, while allowing opportunities for rehabilitation.
Deputy Phan Thị Mỹ Dung from Long An Province raised a different concern. She questioned whether life imprisonment without parole is in fact more humane than the death penalty.
She explained that death row inmates can still receive clemency or pardons from the President, while those sentenced to life without parole face the certainty of spending the rest of their lives behind bars. This could strip away any motivation to reform and increase resistance to rehabilitation.
“Such a sentence could also place long-term burdens on the State and the prison system,” she said.
According to the session’s agenda, the NA is scheduled to vote on the amended Penal Code on June 25.
